Jonah Goldberg in today’s LA TIMES:
As the hopeless but energetic presidential campaign of Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) builds momentum in name recognition, fundraising and cross-ideology appeal, media conservatives are beginning to attack Paul in earnest
You’re usually more on top of things than this, Jonah, so I’m not quite sure what to make of this comment of yours. The attack on Ron Paul’s been going on for several months now. Where have you been?
Syndicated columnist Mona Charen calls Paul “too cozy with kooks and conspiracy theorists.” Film critic and talk radio host Michael Medved looks over Paul’s supporters and finds “an imposing collection of neo-Nazis, white Supremacists, Holocaust deniers, 9/11 ‘truthers’ and other paranoid and discredited conspiracists.”
For the most part, these allegations strike me as overblown and unfair.
I think not. I saw that article that article of Mona’s for example, the other day, and thought it one of the better researched articles on demand I seen thus far. The title “unfair” is a little out of line, given that this stuff is all documented.
But, for argument’s sake, let’s say they’re not. Let’s even say that Paul has the passionate support of the Legion of Doom, that his campaign lunchroom looks like the “Star Wars” cantina, and that many of his top advisors actually have hooves.
Well, I would still find him less scary than Mike Huckabee.
…
What’s troubling about The Man From Hope 2.0 is what he represents. Huckabee represents compassionate conservatism on steroids. A devout social conservative on issues such as abortion, school prayer, homosexuality and evolution, Huckabee is a populist on economics, a fad-follower on the environment and an all-around do-gooder who believes that the biblical obligation to do “good works” extends to using government — and your tax dollars — to bring us closer to the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth.
For example, Huckabee has indicated he would support a nationwide federal ban on public smoking. Why? Because he’s on a health kick, thinks smoking is bad and believes the government should do the right thing.
I suppose I can’t argue that one, Jonah. But, we have survived GWB, and Bill Clinton, the two of which basically you’re describing in Huckabee. Paul is still the bigger concern, for two reasons:
The first is one you yourself mention:
I would not vote for Paul mostly because I think his foreign policy would be disastrous
So it would… and that’s what my own objection boils down to… our inability to survive a Ron Paul Presidency because of that misbegotten foreign policy. As I said at Q&O the other night: Isolation doesn’t work. It never has, in the modern world. That disconnect alone makes me wonder about his mental capacity.
But, secondly, go back and look at Mona’s article again, and tell me anyone in their right mind will be involved in such groups as Ron Paul has been documented as being, even on a slightly removed basis. Sorry, it doesn’t wash.
I’ll grant, Jonah, that Huckabee is the more immediate threat, given he has a bigger chance of being elected. But a Ron Paul presidency constitutes a bigger threat to our nation’s survival… bigger on an order of scale. Mind, I won’t vote for either of them, but there it is.
But there’s something weird going on when Paul, the small-government constitutionalist, is considered the extremist in the Republican Party while Huckabee, the statist, is the lovable underdog.
True, but that’s the nature of the beast. As to a solution, may I suggest better candidates?
Fred Thompson roars to mind.
Discussion, Memeorandum
Tags: Abortion, attack, Bill Clinton, BitsBlog, BitsBlog, BO, Campaign, Che, Clinton, conservatives, Economics, Elections, Foreign Policy, Fred Thompson, Homosexual, hope, Huckabee, Ideology, Jonah Goldberg, Men, Mike Huckabee, NY, oil, politics, Racist, radio, Republican, Republican Party, Republicans, Ron Paul, sex, Texas, truth, UN, unfair
November 20th, 2007 at 18:22
You said:
“I said at Q&O the other night: Isolation doesn’t work. It never has, in the modern world. That disconnect alone makes me wonder about his mental capacity.”
Ron Paul does not believe in Isolationism either, and has stated on numerous occasion that he’s a non interventionist, not a isolationist. There’s a major difference between the two. At least you two can’t argue there. So, since both of you can’t argue, i’m forced to wonder about your mental capacity.
Ah, and your whole argument falls apart at this point, because the current administration is technically distanced our country from the rest of the world. We have become more isolationistic since the neo conservatives took power…
Again, stop spreading the lie that Ron Paul is ‘an isolationist’, it’s simply not factually true…
November 20th, 2007 at 20:18
Sure, he doesn’t.
Which, of course is why he figures we should pull ouy of IRaq before the echo dies.
Oh, and as for our country being ‘distanced form the rest of the world, well, it’s a myth… one I’m sure you’d like us to think, but it’s a myth, and therefore not true.
But since you’re a Paul-Bot who came in here on Google looking up references to your boy, let me lay this out for you, here.
See? All you had to do was read and your Paul-bot myth falls apart.
No sale.
November 26th, 2007 at 18:10
Well, Ron Paul says, and i concur with him, that we should stop the empire, because the empires always fail. Empires can not last because the emperors and guys behind them simply print the money until the currency bombs. We should realize this ‘history repeating’, pull out of not just Iraq, but Japan, Korea, Bosnia and all other countries where we have troops stationed, and therefore ease this economic disaster that we’re headed into, simply because we’re an empire. USA was never designed to be an empire.
Do you really think i would go through the trouble of getting a username, going through signup process, register, just so i can comment, if i was simply yet another ‘Paul-Bot” who found your blog on google? I think not.
(Bit responds,,,, Yes, I do. My spam lists are full of such. I’ve been blessed lately with regular visits from Google’s crawlers, where wehn a new post goes online Google has it within 10 minutes these days. Generates a mess of traffic, but it’s also a curse in that it brings with it the single issue trolls. In this case, All I need do is post the string “Ron Paul” and the spambots crank into high gear, filling my comments, my mailbox, etc, with megabytes of diconnected, pre-fabricated nonsense, that usually has little if anything to do with the issues raised in the post they’re supposedly responding to. usually, this ends up being exact copies of text I’ve seen show up in the comments sections of other sites I frequent. The only reason you haven’t joined them in the spam can is you seem to be somewhat less automated than the remainder. )
No, i’m simply stumbled upon your post on memeorandum, and i couldn’t help but point out falsehoods. It seems to me like you simply don’t understand what you’re writing about, so i just wanted to point that out. Please look into Ron Paul, before saying things about him and his views that are wrong, but also, do keep writing your blog because you seem to be a pretty bright individual, and your action is very important in today’s day and age.
Good luck to you.
(Bit responds: In point of fact, I’ve looked into Ron Paul. I have found him …. wanting. Watch here this afternoon, for yet a few more reasons why Ron Paul is not qualified to be a Congress criter, much less president. )